Wallingford v. Olson

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• reversing denial of summary judgment because video evidence “clearly contradicts the version of the story told by [non- moving party]”
• reversing denial of summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds when “videotape conspicuously refute[d] and completely discredit[ed] [plaintiff]’s version of the material facts upon which she base[d] her excessive force claim”
• “Although we view the facts and any reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to [Petitioner] we cannot ignore incontrovertible evidence which clearly contradicts [Petitioner]’s allegations.”
• “Because the videotape clearly contradicts the version of the story told by Wallingford, we must view the facts in the light depicted by the videotape.” (internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).